Michael Dharma

Old account is @MichaelDha88751. Twitter support broke my old login.

Writer working on my first novel. Creator of the #CosmicEgg multiverse.

#amwriting

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

I've been mulling this over but I'm changing the name of the world in my WIP from #Tiriande to #Tirial. Why?

First, I found that there's a second #Tiriande created by another World Anvil user. This will avoid confusion.

Second, I'm starting to like the sound of #Tirial more.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@scriblotta They have to be done really well to be effective. Usually, they're done poorly.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ As for "free will" I think you mean "original sin." "Sin" isn't even a thing in physics. It's more "supernaturalism."

All of this is the real reason you have nothing to show for peer review, by the way.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ "As for "self-managing" defects, biological breakdown and suffering are the byproduct of our free will and cause and effect."

God can't overcome cause and effect? That means god can't overcome nature then.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ What you're asserting is matter coming from literally nothing with an extra step.

Also, who says matter has to have an "origin"? Physics doesn't.

As for cancer and birth defects, god can't design such things to be self-managing? It's amazing how xtians like to sell god short.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ "You missed the point of the analogy: a creation's attributes don't dictate the Creator's ontological nature."

But in the very next sentence, you assert exactly this. Observe:

"A mind originating matter from nothing makes more logical sense than matter originating itself."

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ And even if I grant "supernaturalism" for the sake of arguments, the deist model fits better than the interventionist Christian model. It would explain why god allows xtians to accuse each other of heresy while god corrects none of them.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ "An engine is made of steel, but the engineer isn't."

Extremely poor analogy. The engineer must work with pre-existing materials, unlike god supposedly building things ex nihilo.

Also, god designs things like childhood bone cancer and birth defects?

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@___TheGOOdWitch Nothing, really. Atheism doesn't take a position on morality one way or the other.

All morality boils down to and leans on subjective consequentialist moral reasoning. Even supposedly "objective" Christian morality steals from it more than they'd care to admit.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ Except none of what you just said is true and reeks of confirmation bias.

"Elegant mathematical laws" never reflect an untestable hypothesis, especially a supernatural one. As for your specific god, a natural world is more likely to come from a natural source.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@iamAtheistGirl Funny how god never actually shows up and delivers his authoritative ruling on the matter.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@mcfee_tyler @stakeinsteak @DrFrankTurek lol bullshit. An intent can be hidden in any form of expression, especially when it starts getting more graphic than necessary to get the point across.

But I'm sure you're goin g to tell me, a writer, about what can and can't be done with writing, aren't you?

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@mcfee_tyler @DrFrankTurek "The Bible passage fails the core test: it was neither created nor is it consumed for sexual stimulation."

Doesn't sound like it to me lol. There was no logical reason to use dick metaphors since nobody can read that shit to their kids, even if you're too biased to see it.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@AiofTikTok @charise_lee Oh, well that explains it. Good point.

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ In other words, it's one thing to say *a* god created everything.

But it takes a ton of main character syndrome to claim *your specific* god created and fine-tuned everything.

And those are pretty much the main criticisms of the argument from fine-tuning. /18

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ Also, FT doesn't uniquely support the *Christian* god (omni-attributes, Trinity, etc.) over deism, a limited designer, simulation, or other intelligences. Additional arguments are needed to bridge to Christianity. /17

[Michael Dharma @WriterDharma]

@Clearpath__ @retrounixgeek @ClearPath_ ...naturalistic framework. Some analyses claim it provides evidence *against* traditional theism. That is, god doesn't need any silly fine tuning. He can do what he likes, especially if he's an artist instead of an engineer. /16